Quote from nomoreoptions:
Alan, I don't know the questions to your millions of (angry) questions when I raise my own questions and doubts.
Now that I have your attention...
You are not just "raising questions". You are always making accusations of ethical violations, with absolutely no evidence to back them up.
I suppose it is possible that, because your "first" language does not appear to be English, your tone is being misunderstood, as mine would be if I attempted to write in Spanish, I language I know just well enough to where my writings might look like yours if I were in a hurry. However, I think I would be far more careful for that reason, certainly when writing something confrontational.
Or perhaps it is normal and inoffensive in your culture to routinely question someone's ethics in this way.
Do understand, though, that in this business (trading), and in this place (ET), many/most interpret your writing in this way.
Might I suggest that you avoid using slang (e.g. "blow off" and "f'ing around"), and instead use more precise language to tell people what you mean? This is a big part of what makes you hard to understand. Between that and the attitude, most people just don't bother trying to figure it out, just assume you are off on another rant, and respond in kind.
But why this is in software forum? It's about a feature of TWS, a TRADING software, quite legitimate.
It's not about a feature of TWS. It's about you accusing TWS of having some "feature" which would be harmful to customers if it worked as you have said. You've not given any rational reason to suppose that it would work this way - there's certainly nothing in the description of this unique new feature that would indicate that it could do what you describe.
With regard to your further questions, which are again difficult/impossible to understand, I can only again suggest that you learn the difference between "assignment", which is what can happen to you when you are short an option, and "exercise", which is what you can do when you're long an option. Exercise, not assignment, is what TWS will now allow one to do in real time. It clearly states that if you attempt to exercise an option and you do not have sufficient margin to hold the resulting underlying position, it will reject the exercise, not dump the position into your account and then immediately liquidate it, as you have accused.
Your comment about the PDT rules (again), which appears to be at least one of the sources of your animosity towards IB, is misguided. Many brokers (including IB) spent millions of dollars on legal expenses and thousands of hours of their time on trying to influence, and then understand, these rules, which do nothing but hurt their business. They already are on your side - they just can't do anything else about it. Or do you (again) think that they should just ignore the exchange rules and laws and risk huge fines (or worse) so you can do what you want?
Alan, I don't know the questions to your millions of (angry) questions when I raise my own questions and doubts.
Now that I have your attention...
You are not just "raising questions". You are always making accusations of ethical violations, with absolutely no evidence to back them up.
I suppose it is possible that, because your "first" language does not appear to be English, your tone is being misunderstood, as mine would be if I attempted to write in Spanish, I language I know just well enough to where my writings might look like yours if I were in a hurry. However, I think I would be far more careful for that reason, certainly when writing something confrontational.
Or perhaps it is normal and inoffensive in your culture to routinely question someone's ethics in this way.
Do understand, though, that in this business (trading), and in this place (ET), many/most interpret your writing in this way.
Might I suggest that you avoid using slang (e.g. "blow off" and "f'ing around"), and instead use more precise language to tell people what you mean? This is a big part of what makes you hard to understand. Between that and the attitude, most people just don't bother trying to figure it out, just assume you are off on another rant, and respond in kind.
But why this is in software forum? It's about a feature of TWS, a TRADING software, quite legitimate.
It's not about a feature of TWS. It's about you accusing TWS of having some "feature" which would be harmful to customers if it worked as you have said. You've not given any rational reason to suppose that it would work this way - there's certainly nothing in the description of this unique new feature that would indicate that it could do what you describe.
With regard to your further questions, which are again difficult/impossible to understand, I can only again suggest that you learn the difference between "assignment", which is what can happen to you when you are short an option, and "exercise", which is what you can do when you're long an option. Exercise, not assignment, is what TWS will now allow one to do in real time. It clearly states that if you attempt to exercise an option and you do not have sufficient margin to hold the resulting underlying position, it will reject the exercise, not dump the position into your account and then immediately liquidate it, as you have accused.
Your comment about the PDT rules (again), which appears to be at least one of the sources of your animosity towards IB, is misguided. Many brokers (including IB) spent millions of dollars on legal expenses and thousands of hours of their time on trying to influence, and then understand, these rules, which do nothing but hurt their business. They already are on your side - they just can't do anything else about it. Or do you (again) think that they should just ignore the exchange rules and laws and risk huge fines (or worse) so you can do what you want?
